The Effects of Body Size and Morphology on the Flight Behavior and Escape Flight Performance of Birds
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1999 The effects of body size and morphology on the flight behavior and escape flight performance of birds Jerred J. Seveyka The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Seveyka, Jerred J., "The effects of body size and morphology on the flight behavior and escape flight performance of birds" (1999). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 6661. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/6661 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. I Maureen and Mike MANSFIELD LIBRARY The University of IVIONTANA Permission is granted by the author to reproduce this material in its entirety, provided that this material is used for scholarly purposes and is properly cited in published works and reports. ** ** Please check "Yes" or "No" and provide signature Yes, I grant permission No, I do not grant permission Author's Signature Date Any copying for commercial purposes or financial gain may be undertaken only with the author's explicit consent. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. THE EFFECTS OF BODY SIZE AND MORPHOLOGY ON THE FLIGHT BEHAVIOR AND ESCAPE FLIGHT PERFORMANCE OF BIRDS by Jerred J. Seveyka B A , University of Montana, Missoula, 1996 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science University of Montana 1999 Approved by Chairr^n, Bo^d of Examiners Dean, Graduate School ( - X o ~ "7 *7 ________________________ Date Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. UMl Number: EP37462 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction Is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, If material had to be removed, a note will Indicate the deletion. UMT Dissartatton Publishing UMl EP37462 Published by ProOuest LLC (2013). Copyright In the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProOuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work Is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQ ^st ProOuest LLC. 789 East Elsenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 -1 3 4 6 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Seveyka, Jerred Joseph, M.S. Fall 1999 Organismal Biology and Ecology The effects of body size and morphology on the flight behavior and escape flight performance of birds Director; Kenneth P. Dial V , In general, takeoff or escape flight performance among birds appears to decrease with increasing body size. Two basic groups of models have been proposed to explain the apparent decline in flight performance. The original models suggest that power available for flight decreases due to the effects of wing moment of inertia on wingbeat frequency, while the power required for flight scales nearly independent of mass. However, more recent models suggest that larger birds produce proportionally less lift per unit power output than smaller birds, which results in a decrease in flight performance. I examined the relationship between body size and escape flight performance among wild birds using five species of doves (Family Columbidae) ranging an order of magnitude in body mass (36g to 360g), while accounting for differences in morphology, flight behavior, and phylogeny. Doves were captured in the wild and subsequently video taped as they escaped from a 2.5 m tall, netted tower. From the video and body masses of the birds, I estimated whole- body mass-specific climb power (Pci) during escape flight, this measurement represents the difference between the power available compared to the power required for flight. In addition, I collected morphometric data for 26 species of doves from museum skeleton and wing collections, so that differences in morphology could be compared to documented differences in performance and flight behavior. As mass increased among the doves, wingbeat frequency and mass-specific power output decreased. Wingspan and fight muscle ratio (flight muscle mass divided by body mass) explained nearly all of the variance in escape flight performance. Birds with relatively short wings and high flight muscle ratio, such as the White-tipped Dove, achieved high escape flight wingbeat frequencies and relatively high mass-specific climb power output. A possible tradeoff associated with these attributes is reduced fast-flight performance. Indeed, Mourning Doves, White-winged Doves, and Rock Doves, the most active flyers in the study, had relatively long wings, lower flight muscle ratios and lower escape-flight performance than the other doves studied. The documented positive correlation between flight muscle size and mass-specific climb power is consistent with the predictions from the original and more recent models on the scaling of flight performance. However, although the documented negative correlation between wing length and escape flight performance is consistent the original models on the scaling of flight performance, this result is contrary to the predictions from the more recent models. Furthermore, total flight muscle mass-specific climb power for five species of doves ranged from 95 to 152 Wkg '. This range is surprisingly similar to reported estimates for total power available for flight, despite the fact that my measurements do not include the aerodynamic or inertial components of total power available. Thus, existing estimates of total power available for flight in birds appear to grossly underestimate total power requirements. II Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................... viü INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 1 MATERIALS AND METHODS.............................................................................. 5 MORPHOMETRICS..................................................................................... 5 FIELD MORPHOMETRICS.......................................................... 5 MORPHOMETRICS OF MUSEUM SPECIMENS................. 6 FIELD OBSERVATIONS.............................................................................. 7 POWER O U TPU T............................................................................................ 9 STATISTICAL ANALYSIS.......................................................................... 12 RESULTS........................................................................................................................ 13 MORPHOMETRICS...................................................................................... 13 FIELD AND ESCAPE FLIGHT OBSERVATIONS................................... 15 KINEM ATICS................................................................................................... 16 VELOCITY AND ACCELERATION.......................................................... 17 CLIMB POWER OUTPUT............................................................................ 18 DISCUSSION................................................................................................................... 20 RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN MORPHOLOGY AND BEHAVIOR 20 KINEM ATICS................................................................................................... 22 iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. FLIGHT PERFORMANCE........................................................................ 24 PERFORMANCE VERSUS FLIGHT BEHAVIOR .............................. 31 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS........................ 34 FUTURE RESEARCH................................................................................ 34 REFERENCES............................................................................................................... 36 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................................................................... 42 TABLES ................................................................................................................. 43 FIGURE LEGENDS .................................................................................................... 53 APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................... 81 TABLES.........................................................................................................